The Human Rights Council this morning discussed the reports of the Independent Expert on the human rights situation in Somalia, Ghanim Alnajjar, and of the Personal Representative of the High Commissioner on the situation of human rights in Cuba, Christine Chanet.

Ghanim Alnajjar, Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Somalia, said over the past six months, Somalia had witnessed a number of significant and rapid developments on the political and security fronts, many of which had serious implications for the human rights of Somalis. It did appear as though there was an apparent calm in the areas controlled by the Islamic Council Union (ICU); however, if the international community did not engage with Somali leaders to transform that relative calm into a lasting peace, the situation would surely and disastrously deteriorate.

In the interactive dialogue, Finland on behalf of the European Union, Italy, Djibouti, United States, and Sudan spoke on human rights situation in Somalia.

Concluding, Ghanim Alnajjar said that Somalia was in a very strategic position, and the situation could develop into a very nasty one if the international community did not engage. Tension would continue, and there were a lot of bad things coming unless there was intervention. There was a judicial and security initiative of the United Nations, which trained police and judges, and this should be supported further.

The Council also heard the Personal Representative of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the human rights situation in Cuba, Christine Chanet, present her report, saying that she had made several attempts to contact the Cuban authorities to initiate a dialogue but had not received any replies. It was impossible to ignore the disastrous and lasting economic and social effects - compounded in 2004 - of the embargo imposed on the Cuban population over 40 years ago, as well as its impacts on civil and political rights. It was worth recalling the unprecedented wave of repression that was unleashed in March-April 2003 in Cuba; the pretext being the active role played by the United States Interests Section in Havana vis-à-vis the political opposition.

Reacting to the report, Cuba, speaking as a concerned country, said that like a disastrous inheritance from the defenestrated and discredited Commission on Human Rights, the Council listened today to the report of the so-called Special Representative for Cuba. The libellous document did not deserve any respect or credibility. The mandate of the Special Representative was a heavy burden of the old Commission, that of hypocrisy, double standards, selectivity and political manipulation. Someone who, with veiled and cautious criticism to the criminal blockade of the United States against Cuba, only questioned it because – in her opinion – it would serve as a pretext for the Cuban Government to apply laws that she qualified as “repressive”, could not pretend to be objective and impartial.

Also this morning, the Council concluded its discussion on the reports of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living; the Special Rapporteur on the right to education; the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises; and the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism.

In his concluding remarks, Miloon Kothari, Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to adequate standard of living, said that it was important not only to have access to housing but also access to water and sanitation, sources of financing, as well as a gender-equality perspective in implementing the right to adequate housing.

Vernor Munoz Villalobos, Special Rapporteur on the right to education, in concluding remarks, said that more efforts were needed to look at the real meaning of education. In achieving the education goals, needs should be seen within the context of the Millennium Development Goals, and there should be a minimum of compulsory education for all which was adapted to the needs of the individuals.

In concluding remarks, John Ruggie, Special Rapporteur on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, said that the previous eras of globalization had unravelled, as they did not secure the values of human communities and social justice. The issue of standards had been among the most controversial issues, for a number of reasons, including political and because it was intellectually an extremely difficult task, as many of the issues being discussed were relatively new subjects for companies.

And, Martin Scheinin, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, said that it was important to States that human rights had to be promoted in the context of the fight against terrorism. On the issue of renditions, he expressed concern over a pending European Union extradition treaty agreement with the United States.

Participating in the interactive dialogue on the reports on housing, education, transnational corporations and counter-terrorism measures were Belgium, Indonesia, Russian Federation, Liechtenstein, Slovenia, Norway, Germany, Mexico, Yemen, Bangladesh, France, Canada, Iran, Cuba, Senegal, United Kingdom, Tunisia, Peru and Algeria.

Zimbabwe and Cambodia exercised the right to reply.

Also taking the floor were non-governmental organizations from : Friends World Committee for Consultation (QUAKER), Europe-Third World Centre, Human Rights Watch, International Federation of Human Rights, Habitat International Coalition, International League for the Rights and Liberation of peoples, International Educational Development, International Women's Rights Action Watch, Human Rights Watch, in a joint statement with Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions,Women's World Summit Foundation, in a joint statement with Rural Women and the Right to Adequate Housing, Interfaith International and Indian Movement “Tupaj Amaru”, in a joint statement with World Peace Council.

The Council will reconvene at 3 p.m. this afternoon to continue its discussion on the human rights situation in Cuba, and to start its review of the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, in Cambodia, in Haiti and in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.


Continuation of Interactive Debate on Reports on Housing, Education, Transnational Corporations and Counter-terrorism

BART OUVRY (Belgium) said with regards to the report on human rights and transnational corporations, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General John Ruggie should continue his efforts with the aim of bringing together the essential participants to establish an international consensus on this matter of great importance. As the Special Representative had said, the ground work was far from being done, particularly at the level of corporations, where opinions remained divergent, including in the industries that were the most exposed to the issue, such as the mining sector.

The Special Representative’s report indicated that he lacked resources to work substantially on the issue of the impact of evaluation studies with regards to human rights. However, he was closely following initiatives of this nature. Mr. Ruggie should give further details on developments to this issue since his report was submitted, and whether the international community and particularly the United Nations and international financial bodies could play a more active role.

BENNY YAN PIETER SIAHAAN (Indonesia) thanked Vernor Munoz Villalobos, Special Rapporteur on the right to education, and Martin Scheinin, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, for their extensive reports. With reference to Mr. Munoz Villalobos’s report, it was a penetrating assessment of the overall situation of education, but also of the way that it affected girls especially, correlating as it did with the issue of gender. Above all, Indonesia noted the important emphasis that the report placed on the fact that education was first and foremost a fundamental human right, and hence on the need to implement it in a broader perspective than merely as a tool towards development.

In Indonesia, with the intensive 9-year compulsory education campaign for boys and girls instituted under law 20/2003, the gender disparities in primary and secondary education had almost been eliminated.

SERGEY CHUMAREV (Russian Federation), referring to the report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, Martin Scheinin, said Russia supported the report and the recommendations contained therein. How did the Rapporteur intend to use the work already done by the Commission on Human Rights on this issue. How could he establish responsibility with regard to acts committed by non-state actors? How could he defend the legitimate rights of States in protecting themselves from acts of terrorism? All measures against terrorism should respect the human rights of the victims. With regard to the report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, the speaker said he fully supported the report and he found it to be interesting. The author’s approach was based on a neo-liberal analysis. He asked who decided the standards of the operations of transnationals.

PATRICK RITTER (Liechtenstein) said the Special Representative on transnational corporations was commended, as was his approach of “principled pragmatism”. Liechtenstein shared his view that his mandate was intended to be primarily evidence-based, and also to provide conceptual clarification where called for or otherwise required. The flaws of the Norms and the divisive debate over them obscured rather than illuminated promising areas of cooperation among business, civil society, Governments and international institutions with respect to human rights.

In which way did the Special Representative intend to use the relevant experience acquired in the Global Compact for his compilation of best practices of States and transnational corporations, Liechtenstein asked, also asking whether the Special Representative planned to structure the compendium of best practices in accordance with the different human rights challenges of various industry sectors as well as different levels of Government. With regards to the Special Rapporteur on terrorism, he should explain his ideas about the role he could play in the promotion and implementation of the new Counter-Terrorism Strategy of the United Nations and the respective interaction with the Human Rights Council.

ALENKA MARKOV (Slovenia) said Slovenia fully supported the questions posed by Finland and wished to add three more questions. Slovenia welcomed the information on the numerous activities of Martin Scheinin, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, in particular on the established communication with the Counter-Terrorism Committee and the United Nations Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force. Slovenia wanted to know more on the meetings with the International Committee of the Red Cross, the Terrorism Prevention Branch of the UNODC and the Action Against Terrorism Unit of the OSCE, which were planned at the time of the submission of the Special Rapporteur’s report.

Slovenia welcomed information on the exchange with the Counter-Terrorism Committee and supported the Special Rapporteur’s desire for a continued dialogue. How did the Special Rapporteur see his role in increasing awareness of human rights when formulating counter-terrorism policies. Lastly, Slovenia asked the Special Rapporteur what kind of coordination with other special procedures did he consider useful for fulfilling his mandate.

WEGGER STROMMEN (Norway), referring to the report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, said Norway appreciated the out-reach efforts by the author through the holding of several regional multi-stakeholder consultations. An issue highlighted in the report was the need to engage state-owned enterprises in addressing human rights challenges in their spheres of operation. What was the view of the Rapporteur on how those enterprises could be engaged in a constructive manner. Did the Rapporteur see a potential role of the Office of the High Commissioner in supporting companies facing challenges when developing effective human rights policies?

MARTIN FRICK (Germany) said with regards to the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to education, the provision of high quality education that enabled all children, especially those from disadvantaged groups, to participate in society and an ever-faster evolving world of work was high on the agenda. The Special Rapporteur’s visit to Germany had been very useful, and had enriched the ongoing debate on educational reform in the country.

On the report of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing, his initiative on the basic principles and guidelines for States on development-based evictions and displacement was welcomed. In the view of the Special Rapporteur, what were the main issues of concern in relation to relief and rehabilitation efforts, and the implementation of the right to adequate housing and how could the international community effectively incorporate human rights standards into humanitarian relief policies and practices?

JOSE ANTONIO GUEVARA (Mexico) thanked the three Special Rapporteurs and the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for their respective reports. Mexico wished to refer first to the report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises. The report made important contributions, for instance, it offered elements for those working on the universal definition of terrorism that guaranteed the respect of human rights; it also identified some of the main trends in violations of human rights by some States in their fight against terrorism. Mexico wished to know if the Special Rapporteur would identify best practices by States in the protection of human rights while fighting terrorism, as well as his own observations and other independent contributions.

Mexico thanked Miloon Kothari, Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, and on the right to non-discrimination in this context. Mexico particularly supported references made in the report to call for a general recommendation on the right of women to adequate housing and land.

WALID AETHARY (Yemen) said that the report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism was a valuable one. Yemen would continue to cooperate with him as it had done in the past. Yemen continued to take appropriate measures to ensure countering terrorism while respecting human rights.

MUSTAFISUR RAHMAN (Bangladesh) said on the report on terrorism, the menace of this should be suppressed, but Governments should ensure that counter-terrorism measures respected basic human rights. Under the pretext of combating terrorism, vulnerable groups were targeted, with Muslims in particular being made into victims. There was no internationally accepted definition of terrorism. On the report on transnational corporations and human rights, it was not easy, as the debate on draft Norms on the responsibility of transnational corporations had been stalled. Did the Special Representative think that these Norms were achievable.

On the report to the right to housing, eviction was not always carried out with negative motives - development-based eviction had its positive points. The right to development should be included in the right to adequate housing.

GALLIANNE PALAYRET (France) thanked John Ruggie, Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, for his report. France supported the statement made by Finland on behalf of the European Union, and wished to ask John Ruggie if his reference to encouraging public enterprises to address the challenge of human rights would also be extended to all the main actors in the private sector.

JOHN VON KAUFMANN (Canada), referring to the report on the right to adequate housing, said that some of the most important work the Special Rapporteur had done was related to women and housing. Canada was pleased that he had made a special effort to integrate gender equality into all aspects of his work. His assessment of the relationship between the right to adequate housing and violence against women was of particular interest. What were the views of the Rapporteur on the main issues with respect to that relationship and what practical steps could States take to deal with the problem?

MOSTAFA ALAEI (Iran) said with regards to the report on human rights and terrorism, how did the Special Rapporteur assess the cooperation of those specific countries which had not responded to his communications; what would be the practical suggestions for satisfactory compliance of the concerned countries with international humanitarian law and human rights law; how could these countries best cope with alleviation of the root causes of terrorism rather than the breach international humanitarian law and human rights law through misleading unilateral actions; and could the Special Rapporteur further elaborate in future reports on the adverse effect of the new legislative bills drafted in specific countries on the realisation of the human rights of victims whose freedom was being endangered through constant arbitrary and unlawful action taken by the relevant authorities of the administration in those countries, the speaker asked.

YURI ARIEL GALA LOPEZ (Cuba) thanked Martin Scheinin, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, for his report. Cuba noted that the Special Rapporteur’s report devoted ample space to the question of the definition of terrorism. In this respect, Cuba noted that in the elaboration of the definition of terrorism, there was no clear indication that would distinguish terrorist acts from the legitimate fight of peoples to attain self-determination; neither was there any reference to ways of determining state-sponsored terrorism. Cuba thought that the mandate of the Special Rapporteur entailed following closely concrete cases of human rights violations in the framework of the fight against terrorism.

EL HADJI IBOU BOYE (Senegal) thanked the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises for his report. The issue was a concern for Senegal within the context of gloabalization marked by maximizing profits. Did the Representative think that fusions of enterprises or their dislocation constituted an impediment to the enjoyment of human rights?

CAROLINE REES (United Kingdom) said with regards to the report on transnational corporations, great importance was placed on corporate responsibility, as transnational corporations had an impact, both positive and negative, on the enjoyment of human rights. The United Kingdom believed that this issue could not be moved forward without building a critical mass on what action was needed, involving both States and transnational corporations. That critical mass of consensus should also include civil society and business. Could the Special Representative say more about the reactions and views he had received from the business sphere, the speaker asked.

SAMIR LABIDI (Tunisia) thanked Vernor Munoz Villalobos, Special Rapporteur on the right to education, and Miloon Kothari, Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to adequate standard of living, and on the right to non-discrimination in this context, for their respective reports. With reference to the right to decent housing, Tunisia attached great importance to the realization of this right. It was a question of human dignity, and the right to decent housing should be within the reach of all, including the most disadvantaged groups of society. In Tunisia, more than 80 per cent of the population owned their houses, and special efforts were underway to assist the lower-income bracket of the population.

With reference to the right to girls’ education, it was an equally important issue for Tunisia. Tunisia fought for full school attendance, and education was compulsory up to the age of 16. Tunisia, in its effort to implement the right of girls to education, put the emphasis on efficiency, quality and justice. Important steps had been taken to increase the number of rural schools and girls’ attendance rated had been improved.

ELIANA BERAUN ESCUDERO (Peru), speaking on the report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing, said Special Rapporteur Miloon Kothari had stressed in his report the promotion and respect of human rights, particularly those of vulnerable groups. His missions, which included a visit to Peru in 2003, had been valuable because of his specific recommendations following his country visits. The recommendations of Mr. Kothari constituted a constructive and important step in the promotion of human rights within the context of the right to housing. His report had also addressed the issue of forced evictions. What were the views of the Rapporteur on the effective implementation of international human rights standards within the respect for housing rights?

With regard to the report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, the speaker said the report was compiled in a historical context. The indiscriminate use of violence and acts of terrorism should be condemned. The author had attempted to seek a relevant definition of terrorism. He had also addressed the issue of state-actors. Concerning the report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, the speaker said the abuses committed by such entities were of a concern to Peru.

IDRISS JAZAÏRY (Algeria) said the same concerns expressed by the delegation of Cuba were shared on the issue included in Mr. Scheinin’s report on the definition of terrorism. The Special Rapporteur made a courageous attempt to define terrorism, and this was commended, but then some aspects were included, others were excluded, and there was no explanation of what was not terrorism, including the issue of people fighting for their right to self-determination. Algeria supported the conclusion of an International Convention Against Terrorism, but this was an issue on which there was no general agreement.

RACHEL BRETT, of Friends World Committee for Consultation (QUAKER), welcomed the reports and work of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to adequate standard of living, and on the right to non-discrimination in this context, and the Special Rapporteur on the right to education. The focus on the important subject of girls’ right to education and the impediments to it was constructive and valuable. The Committee asked the Special Rapporteur if he planned to continue a thematic approach to the subject of the right to education, and if he would consider dedicating a report to the subject of the right to education all children in any form of detention or imprisonment, including children in prison with their mothers.

MELIK OZDEN, of Centre Europe – Tiers Monde, said the organization was not surprised by the content of the report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, given that this mandate did not measure up to the challenges posed. As well, the Special Representative affirmed that his ideas were supported by eminent jurists and experts from three countries. Those experts and jurists belonged to the same juridical system and shared with the Special Representative the same visions of globalization and the role of transnational corporations. Many studies showed the importance of having an international judicial framework for transnational corporations. The Council should consider urgently the Norms concerning the conduct of transnational corporations adopted in 2003 by the Sub-Commission for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and put in place a monitoring system.

STEVE GRASHAW, of Human Rights Watch, said with regards to the Special Rapporteur on counter-terrorism, terrorism was an anathema to the very concept of human rights. Recent counter-terrorism measures in a number of countries had made deep encroachments on a range of human rights. It was of concern that a developing international framework on counter-terrorism obliged States to combat terrorism, without defining this, and some States used this as a legitimisation of rights violations. What did the Special Rapporteur recommend the Human Rights Council do to create a definition of terrorism, the speaker asked.

SIMIA AHMADI, of International Federation of Human Rights, thanked Martin Scheinin, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, for his excellent report. How could the Counter Terrorism Committee conduct an appropriate and effective review of national practices. When a monitoring organ was dealing with human rights, proceedings must be transparent and public. The International Federation of Human Rights believed that if terrorism was a threat to fundamental freedoms and human rights, it was only through the promotion, respect and protection of these rights that one could adequately fight terrorism. The Council should adopt a final resolution that condemned Guantanamo, extraordinary rendition, and disproportionate counter terrorism measures.

ELENA SANTIEMMA, of International League for the Rights and Liberation of Peoples, asked the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises about the importance and space he attached in his work to the Sub-Commission norms on the responsibilities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises with regard to human rights.

KAREN PARKER, of International Educational Development, said failure to define terrorism had led to the continued use of terms such as the war on terrorism, as if it were a real war, invoking humanitarian law, rather than a rhetorical war, such as the war on poverty or the war on drugs. Purposeful blurring of both human rights law and humanitarian law was having very serious consequences, not least of which was the right to self-determination. The blurring was exceptionally apparent in the United States. At the same time that possible terrorism was treated as armed conflict to dodge criminal procedure rights, certain actual armed conflicts, such as the ones in Turkey and Sri Lanka, were treated as terrorism to dodge the application of humanitarian law.

ANURADHA RAO, of International Women’s Rights Action Watch, commended the report of Miloon Kothari, Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, and on the right to non-discrimination in this context, in integrating a gender perspective into the monitoring and reporting dimensions of his mandate, recognizing the indivisibility of rights. The organization urged Members of the Council to continue support of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur and to give priority to implement the recommendations he had made. In particular, it supported the recommendation that Members of the Council ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women and ensure than an effective Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights was drafted and adopted speedily.

SEBASTIEN GILLIOZ, of Human Rights Watch, in a joint statement with Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions, said every year, millions of people become victims of forced evictions. Human Rights Watch commended the Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing for dealing with the issue of 700,000 people evicted in Zimbabwe. He should be invited to that country to further study the situation. The right to adequate housing could not be achieved without addressing the issue of vulnerable groups, who were victims of discrimination.

SHIVANI CHAUDHRY, of Habitat International Coalition, said of special concern was the rise in forced evictions across the world, and these resulted from factors ranging from city beautification to large-scale infrastructure projects. The systematic demolition of housing of the working poor and resulting evictions in the guise of the public interest were deeply disturbing. The growth of market forces, privatisation of essential services, and erosion of State-sponsored public housing programmes was excluding more and more people from accessing their right to adequate housing, and the Special Rapporteur should elaborate on market-based evictions and suggest strategies to reverse this disturbing trend.

ELLY PRADERVAND, Women's World Summit Foundation, in a joint statement with Rural Women and the Right to Adequate Housing, thanked Miloon Kothari, Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, and on the right to non-discrimination in this context, for his report. What could civil society organizations and governments do together to implement the basic right to adequate housing; what legislative provisions would the Special Rapporteur recommend to gender-sensitive housing policies, and how to introduce an anti-violence provision in housing legislation and policies to ensure that domestic violence laws included the protection of women’s rights to adequate housing.

SARDAR SHAUKAT ALI KASHMIRI, of Interfaith International, referring the report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism, said that Interfaith International saw that States were using the process of countering terrorism to advance anti-democratic agendas and the excuse had become a handy weapon to strangulate the human rights movement. Some States were using it as a cover to perpetuate their undemocratic tenures and to bluff the world community.


LAZARO PARY, of Indian Movement “Tupaj Amaru”, in a joint statement with World Peace Council, said with regards to transnational corporations, these were actually super-States within States, and they needed to be regulated in order to provide a legal framework for the new international world order. This was urgent, as they behaved irrationally, with no laws, and without submission to the laws of the host country, ravaging natural resources. State players had lost the ability to negotiate and could not claim jurisdiction over transnational corporations operating within their borders.

Concluding Statements by the Special Procedures on Housing, Education, Transnational Corporations and Counter-Terrorism

MILOON KOTHARI, Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, and on the right to non-discrimination in this context, in answering questions from the floor, thanked Council Members for the tremendous interest shown. He thanked Iran for the invitation to undertake his mission to the country. The Special Rapporteur was well aware of the wide range of work carried out by the Iranian Government on housing. The point the Special Rapporteur wanted to make was on the observation he made on the multiplicity of institutions dealing with housing, and hence the need to coordination among them. In addition, the Special Rapporteur said the elderly were being left out of the housing delivery system. Iran should reconsider its legislation that did not permit eviction victims to challenge a forced eviction or displacement due to development projects. The Special Rapporteur suggested setting up a process of consultation, compensation, and exploring alternatives to a forced eviction.

With reference to Cambodia, the Special Rapporteur said that Cambodia was not the only country where squatters had moved to urban centers from impoverished rural areas. The Special Rapporteur offered to continue working in close collaboration with the Government and with HABITAT.

Lastly, with reference to a question by Switzerland on property ownership, the Special Rapporteur that in the current neo-liberal policies environment, the social dimension of property was in danger. He found the thesis by Hernando de Soto on property ownership pertinent, but he thought that his model lacked elements with relation to the indivisibility of human rights. It was important not only to have access to housing but also access to water and sanitation, sources of financing, as well as a gender-equality perspective in implementing the right to adequate housing.

VERNOR MUNOZ VILLALOBOS, Special Rapporteur on the right to education, said that the Special Rapporteur should have contacts with civil society, which was not the case with Botswana. The infrastructure of education in Botswana should be improved and that education should be studied in depth. More efforts were needed to look at the real meaning of education. What was the purpose of education if educated people were also participating in armed conflicts? With regard to other countries, there was a need to include the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action in the educational programmes. The issue of persons with disability and those whose liberty was deprived of would be treated in his next report. The issue of war conflict that hampered education would also be given a place in his report.

Portugal had put a number of issues particularly in achieving the education needs with the Millennium Development Goals. There should be a minimum of compulsory education for all which was adapted to the needs of those individuals. Major efforts should be made in that area. Canada had pointed that human rights and education should be for all. The authorities of each State should make this issue a reality.

JOHN RUGGIE, Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, said he would follow up bilaterally any subject that was not covered here. Previous eras of globalization had unravelled, as they did not secure the values of human communities and social justice. The issue of standards had been among the most controversial issues, for a number of reasons, including political and because it was intellectually an extremely difficult task, as many of the issues being discussed were relatively new subjects for companies. International human rights standards had been adopted by States for States, and the issue was which of these, if any, should be transposed to become human rights standards for corporations, and there was no methodology for this. The content of standards should be separated from the status of standards in the process.

The Special Rapporteur’s task, as he saw it, was to do his utmost to do a mapping of which were the substantive standards that were applicable to transnational corporations. The Council however should decide on the applicability, as this was not his job. A number of delegations had referred to various kinds of consultations, and his initial report did not cover all the activities. There were four legal workshops, with representatives of every legal tradition and system, bar none, so nothing would be missed.

MARTIN SCHEININ, Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, answering questions from the floor, referred first to Turkey as a concerned country. The Special Rapporteur agreed with Turkey that he should not expand his mandate. Nevertheless, there might be different interpretations on the scope of the mandate. It was important to state that human rights had to be promoted in the context of the fight against terrorism. On methodology, the Special Rapporteur found it difficult not to share his observations with such a vibrant civil society in the country. The Special Rapporteur was also accountable to the public and the media. In spite of that, the Special Rapporteur assured Turkey that reports should be first shared with the concerned country.

With reference to a question by Switzerland on ensuring that Security Council resolutions and other United Nations bodies were compatible with the full implementation of international human rights norms, the Special Rapporteur said that this issue was moot in the sense that the Security Council had included a paragraph in its Resolution 1624 addressing this matter. On the question of listing issues of terrorism, he was dealing with it in his upcoming report to the General Assembly.

On extraordinary renditions, there were many actors involved. The Special Rapporteur expressed concern over a pending European Union extradition treaty agreement with the United States. The Special Rapporteur was assured that this agreement was part of an overall treaty of formal extraditions.

On Chile’s question on reporting more regularly to the Council, the Special Rapporteur thought it was still premature to take conclusions, but considered as possible mechanisms the universal periodic review. With reference to a question by Finland on targeting specific persons or groups that were victims of violations of human rights, he would deal with this issue in his December report.

With reference to the Russian Federation question, the Special Rapporteur was aware of the work of the Subcommittee and would incorporate their work into his. Lastly, on accountability of non-state actors, some mechanisms could be implemented through the work of the International Criminal Court.


Right of Reply

ENOS MAFEMBA (Zimbabwe), in a right of reply, said the Government of Zimbabwe stressed that the evictions being carried out were not arbitrary or illegal. Notices had been published in local journals to announce in advance the measures to be taken. The eviction measures had not been considered illegal. The Government had been adopting measures to uphold the rights of its people and to advance development.

There were also regional consultations, and the lessons from these were, among others: that local stakeholders were immensely practical, wanting investment, jobs, and remedies for abuses, and for these to have been provided now; and that all in the room had been criticised for paying too much attention to transnational corporations and not to national companies, which had been described as more abusive and less susceptible to pressure than transnational corporations; the importance of State responsibility and the need to increase capacity to adjudicate and regulate. There was a project on State-owned enterprises, the Special Rapporteur said, and these should be, although they were not always, far more responsive to the requirements of the Government than other companies.

VUN CHHEANG (Cambodia), speaking in a right to reply, said Cambodia needed assistance and technical and financial cooperation to work with international organizations and other Governments. Mr. Kothari’s report did not reflect the true housing situation.


Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Somalia

The Council has before it a report (A/HRC/2/CRP.2) entitled report of the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Somalia, which states that between March 2005 and February 2006, Somalia appeared to take another tentative step forward on the perilous road to peace and security. Following the political progress made last year with the establishment of the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) and the Transitional Federal Parliament (TFP), and after several months of political wrangling over safe relocation of the government, the year 2006 began with the signing of the Aden Declaration on 5 January by President Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed and the Speaker of the Transitional Federal Parliament, Sharif Hassan Sheikh Aden. The Declaration was followed by the convening of the first session of the Transitional Federal Parliament inside Somalia, in Baidoa on 26 February 2006.

Nevertheless, in the period covered by the report, Somalia was still generally characterized by widespread insecurity, extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests and detention, threats to press freedoms, violations of the human rights of women and children and infringements on economic, social and cultural rights.

The humanitarian situation in Somalia is also still a cause for serious concern with over 2 million people, mostly in south and central Somalia, in need of urgent humanitarian assistance due to the severe drought in the country and the sub-region. Although some Gu spring rains eventually arrived, they were insufficient to overcome the problem, and Somalia is likely to remain in a drought crisis for the foreseeable period. The United Nations has launched a revised consolidated appeal for
$326.7 million to address this emergency, however humanitarian assistance is often blocked from reaching vulnerable populations due to the lack of security. This serious humanitarian situation can also undermine political gains if it is not contained in a timely manner.

Presentation of the Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Somalia

GHANIM ALNAJJAR, Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Somalia, said over the past six months, Somalia had witnessed a number of significant and rapid developments on the political and security fronts, many of which had serious implications for the human rights of Somalis. Two weeks ago, the African Union had agreed to send 8,000 peace-keeping forces to Somalia to support the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) and to help stabilise the country. The outcome of the talks in Khartoum were welcomed, and further progress was urged in the next round of talks, scheduled to take place on 31 October. These positive talks were not enough - the initiatives should be moved along and supported by more engagement from the international community in order to further consolidate peace-building efforts.

It did appear as though there was an apparent calm in the areas controlled by the ICU; however, if the international community did not engage with Somali leaders to transform this relative calm into a lasting peace, the situation would surely and disastrously deteriorate. It was also very regrettable that some of these recent developments had also caused a lot of suffering for the people: threats and attacks on the safety and security of civilians was once more a fact of life, and appeared to be escalating in terms of regularity and intensity. There had also been several targeted killings of humanitarian aid workers, human rights defenders and public figures.

In the period covered by the report, Somalia was still generally characterised by widespread insecurity, extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests and detention, threats to press freedoms, violations of the human rights of women and children, and infringements on economic, social and cultural rights, where the situation was still a grave cause for concern. The humanitarian situation was also a cause for serious concern with over 2 million people in need of urgent humanitarian assistance due to the severe drought in the country and sub-region. The international community should support the Somali leaders and civil society in the critical human rights work that should occur if peace and security were to prevail in Somalia, and this should include ensuring technical and financial support to strengthen civil society, establishing independent national institutions, protecting internally-displaced persons, establishing and upholding the rule of law, and protecting economic, social and cultural rights.

Interactive Dialogue on Situation in Somalia

ANN MARI FROBERG (Finland), speaking on behalf of the European Union, welcomed the report by Ghanim Alnajjar, Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Somalia, and thanked him for drawing the attention of the international community to the situation of human rights in Somalia. The European Union was deeply concerned about the continuing tensions in Somalia and was committed to assist and engage in the process towards peace and reconciliation. The Somali peace process could only become a reality with the will and effort of the Somali people themselves, including the active involvement of civil society and women’s groups. Finland asked which measures could the international community and the Council, in particular, take to assist Somalia in the promotion and protection of human rights, in particularly in relation to minorities and internally-displaced persons. The dramatic human rights situation of women and children merited serious concern. The Somali women and girls continued to be subjected to gender-based violence, including female genital mutilation, in particular the practice of infibulations, and rape. Finland asked about steps to be taken to eradicate such phenomena.

ROBERTO VELLANO (Italy) asked the Special Rappporteur on the human rights situation in Somalia about effective measures to resolve the problem relating to internally displaced persons, who were victims of trafficking. With regard to the issue of property, which was a controversial issue, he asked the Rapporteur about the means in order to settle this problem. Concerning the judicial system, what suggestions could the Rapporteur indicate in addressing the problem of the current situation in Somalia, including the Sharia, Islamic law?

MOHAMED ZIAD DOUALEH (Djibouti) said an excellent job had been done, in particular the attention that was drawn to the critical human rights situation, which was linked to the developments in politics and security. The Independent Expert’s view that the attempted assassination of President Yusuf was a means to try to destroy the political reconciliation process was agreed with. What was necessary was for the process to not be broken off, and Djibouti wondered if the troops sent by the African Union could help with the process of dialogue, or would they be thwarted by the process.

VELIA DE PIRRO (United States) welcomed the report of Ghanim Alnajjar, Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Somalia. It was an insightful assessment, and the United States appreciated the thoroughness in the Expert’s efforts in meeting with concerned individuals from local, regional, and state institutions, as well as a number of civil society organizations, human rights defenders, and UN teams. The United States wished to draw particular attention to the plight of internally displaced persons in Somalia. There had been slight gains in some areas, but it was important to note the unmet needs for better coordination and assistance for this population. The United States asked the Independent Expert on the impact that efforts to reform the coordination of humanitarian assistance had had in regard to the special protection needs of internally displaced persons. It also asked if the Independent Expert had any thoughts on the possibilities for better partnership and coordination among civil society organizations in the region and international organizations such as United Nations country teams.

HAMATO MUKHTAR MUSA (Sudan) said the Government of Sudan attached great importance to the situation in Somalia, which affected the whole region. The dialogue between the Islamic Courts Union and the Provisional Government of Somalia was essential to establish a lasting peace in the country. Sudan was hosting the meeting between the two parties.

Concluding Statement on the Situation of Human Rights in Somalia

GHANIM ALNAJJAR, Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Somalia, said with regards to recent developments, the problem was that these had been very rapid, and could not be followed closely, aside from meeting people outside Somalia. However, if the international community did not engage seriously in trying to avoid real confrontation, then the situation would get worse. Somalia was in a very strategic position, and the situation could develop into a very nasty one if the international community did not engage. There should be support. Sudan was hosting the peace tasks between the ICU and the TFG, and the Government of Sudan was thanked for this. Somalia had been violated by everyone in the world - its shores and coastline had been violated by international companies with no interference. It was viewed as a security problem. Tension would continue, and there were a lot of bad things coming unless there was intervention.

Children in Somalia, aside from Somaliland, had a rate of access to education of 13%, which was unacceptable. Women also continued to suffer all practices of discrimination. As for internally-displaced persons, in honesty, when going to camps in Somalia, these were like leaving the real world, as the situation was unbelievable. It was bad, and it would be worse over the coming days. Over the last month alone, 4,200 people alone had fled to Ethiopia. Human trafficking was also a significant problem. As for land and property, there was an initiative within the Somali context, as 80 per cent of people worked in livestock, and therefore land was very important and had a social context. There would be no settlement to the situation without settlement of land.

There was a judicial and security initiative of the United Nations which trained police and judges, and this should be supported further. The decision of the African troops coming in was very sensitive, and the Special Rapporteur hoped the peace process would continue, with no need for foreign troops. There was a good deal of work with the United Nations country team, and that should be supported as much as possible. There was a great deal of cooperation between the Special Rapporteur and the team.

Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Cuba

The Council has before it a report (E/CN.4/2006/33) entitled report of the Personal Representative of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the situation of human rights in Cuba, which states that in accordance with the mandate entrusted to her in Commission on Human Rights resolutions 2002/18, 2003/13, 2004/11 and 2005/12, the Personal Representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights made several attempts to contact the Cuban authorities to initiate a dialogue with them in order to fulfill her mandate of examining the situation of human rights in Cuba. The Personal Representative of the High Commissioner has received no reply from the Cuban authorities.

Despite these difficulties, the Personal Representative of the High Commissioner has made an effort to carry out an objective and impartial assessment of the evolution of the situation in Cuba in relation to civil and political rights, in accordance with her mandate. She gave a hearing to non-governmental organizations. She familiarized herself with all the documents relating to Cuba, which were made available to her by the Office of the High Commissioner and the Special Rapporteurs. During a mission, the Personal Representative of the High Commissioner met representatives of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights as well as academics studying the political and economic situation in Latin America, and particularly in Cuba.

Positive aspects must once again be noted in the sphere of economic, social and cultural rights, especially in the areas of education and health, where the Cuban authorities were making major efforts, in particular as regards funding.

Cuba has cooperated with the Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights defenders and the Chairperson of the Working Group on arbitrary detention, who, on 26 July 2005, jointly sent Cuba a joint allegation letter concerning the situation of several persons who were arrested on 22 July 2005.

It is impossible to ignore the disastrous and lasting economic and social effects - compounded in 2004 - of the embargo imposed on the Cuban population over 40 years ago, as well as its impacts on civil and political rights. The scope of the embargo has been increased as a result of tighter economic and financial restrictions that significantly limited the movement of persons, which the United States of America imposed in May 2004. They included, in particular, weight restrictions on registered luggage, family visits limited to one every three years, fewer educational exchanges and restrictions on sporting exchanges.

The Personal Representative of the High Commissioner has drawn up 10 recommendations intended to put an end to the current situation through restoration of the guaranteed fundamental rights of citizens in the country and international protection of those rights through Cuba’s accession to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as its two optional protocols and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

Statement by the Independent Expert on Cuba

CHRISTINE CHANET, Personal Representative of the High Commissioner
for Human Rights, on the situation of human rights in Cuba, said that this was the fourth time she came to report before the Commission and now to the Council in accordance to her mandate entrusted to her in Commission on Human Rights resolutions 2002/18, 2003/13, 2004/11 and 2005/12. In spite of the fact that the Personal Representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights had made several attempts to contact the Cuban authorities to initiate a dialogue with them to fulfill her mandate of examining the situation of human rights in Cuba, she had not received any replies from the Cuban authorities.

Despite these difficulties, the Personal Representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights had maintained a certain level of information flow, made an effort to carry out an objective and impartial assessment of the evolution of the situation in Cuba in relation to civil and political rights, and made some recommendations.

It was impossible to ignore the disastrous and lasting economic and social effects - compounded in 2004 - of the embargo imposed on the Cuban population over 40 years ago, as well as its impacts on civil and political rights.

It was worth recalling the unprecedented wave of repression that was unleashed in March-April 2003 in Cuba; the pretext being the active role played by the United States Interests Section in Havana vis-à-vis the political opposition. Nearly 80 members of civil society were arrested. They were tried and sentenced to very long prison terms. The Personal Representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights expressed concerned over the mental and physical condition of those in detention.

The Personal Representative of the High Commissioner had drawn up 10 recommendations intended to put an end to the current situation through restoration of the guaranteed fundamental rights of citizens in the country and international protection of those rights through Cuba’s accession to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as its two Optional Protocols and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

Statement by Concerned Country

JUAN ANTONIO FERNANDEZ PALACIOS (Cuba), speaking as a concerned country, said that like a disastrous inheritance from the defenestrated and discredited Commission on Human Rights, the Council listened today to the report of the so-called Special Representative for Cuba. The libellous document did not deserve any respect or credibility. His delegation would send it to the same place it had sent previous reports: the paper-recycling bin. The mandate of the Special Representative was a heavy burden of the old Commission, that of hypocrisy, double standards, selectivity and political manipulation. Among the multiple occupations of the Representative, that had not been exactly an honourable job. Sooner rather than later, no one would remember her illegitimate mandate. Someone who, with veiled and cautious criticism to the criminal blockade of the United States against Cuba, only questioned it because – in her opinion – it would serve as a pretext for the Cuban Government to apply laws that she qualified as “repressive”, could not pretend to be objective and impartial. Ms. Chanet intended to deny to defend the homeland and to struggle for its survival as a nation against the most powerful and aggressive empire in history.

Someone who, as a last resort, when carrying out its mandate ended up being an instrument serving the interests of a fascist clique which tried to produce and generously finance mercenaries at their service from Washington under the false disguise of “dissidents”, could not pretend to be independent. How to explain then that the so-called Special Representative had not made any mention in her report of the acts of terrorism carried out with total impunity against the Cuban people form the United States territory and to the fact that Luis Posada Carriles, the most notorious terrorist of the Western hemisphere, was still in that country without being judged or extradited for his acts? How could she keep an accomplice silence about the cause of the five Cuban young men who remained arbitrarily imprisoned in the United States for fighting against terrorism and defending the lives of the Cuban people? It was the Third World, representing two thirds of humanity, which Cuba thanked for the privilege of giving it a seat in the Council so that it could continue to raise its voice against injustices and the subjugation of the powerful.